Hosmer v. Wallace was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a party can be held liable for a breach of contract when the contract was not signed by the party. The case involved a dispute between two parties, Hosmer and Wallace, over a contract for the sale of a piece of land. Hosmer had agreed to purchase the land from Wallace, but the contract was never signed by Wallace. Hosmer argued that he should be able to enforce the contract against Wallace, while Wallace argued that he could not be held liable for a contract that he had not signed. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Wallace, ruling that a party cannot be held liable for a contract that they have not signed. The Court reasoned that a contract must be signed by both parties in order to be legally binding, and that a party cannot be held liable for a contract that they have not signed. The Court also noted that the parties had not taken any other steps to make the contract legally binding, such as having it witnessed or notarized. As a result, the Court held that Wallace could not be held liable for the contract.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Hosmer v. Wallace, arguing that a court of equity should not interfere with an election unless it is clear that fraud or corruption has been committed. He argued that the majority's decision to set aside an election based on technicalities was wrong and would lead to further confusion and uncertainty about elections going forward. Furthermore, he noted that there were no allegations of fraud or corruption in this case, so setting aside the results would be unjustified. Justice Field concluded by stating his belief that courts should only intervene when there are serious issues at stake such as bribery or other forms of illegal activity; otherwise they should allow elections to stand as decided by voters without interference from judicial bodies.